bug-gnulib@gnu.org mirror (unofficial)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org, Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] year2038: support glibc 2.34 _TIME_BITS=64
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2021 07:36:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <871r891i5w.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f182a9a7-cb05-e2e0-70ac-24037d36cf0d@cs.ucla.edu> (Paul Eggert's message of "Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:58:17 -0700")

* Paul Eggert:

> On 7/7/21 1:45 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
>> Y2038 support requires recompilation.  If you are able to do that, why
>> not recompile for a 64-bit architecture?
>
> Doesn't this argue against _TIME_BITS=64 in general? It seems to be
> saying that one should just recompile for 64-bit, and never use 
> _TIME_BITS=64.

I think it does, but apparently 32-bit Arm is an outlier, related to
DRAM sizes.  I'm still not convinced that glibc needs to support that,
but the community wasn't opposed to it.

>> This probably needs per-package/component work to enable dual ABI,
>> similar to what glibc did for its time_t interfaces....
>> I don't expect many upstreams to support this effort.
>
> Agreed.
>> Two separate i386 ports seem to require the least human
>> resources to maintain.
>
> That's a reasonable approach and if people want to do that they can,
> even with the latest Gnulib and the next version of Glibc.
>
> However, people who want to run old binaries will surely stick to the
> 32-bit-time_t i386 port, which means they won't use the 64-bit-time_t 
> i386 port. So it's not clear to me that they will cotton to this approach.

Sorry, I don't understand.  Which approach?

I expect the legacy i386 port to be the main one.

Thanks,
Florian



  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-08  5:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-02  2:33 [PATCH] year2038: support glibc 2.34 _TIME_BITS=64 Paul Eggert
2021-07-02 15:32 ` Florian Weimer
2021-07-02 22:29   ` Bruno Haible
2021-07-03  2:40     ` Paul Eggert
2021-07-05 14:32     ` Florian Weimer
2021-07-05 20:14       ` Paul Eggert
2021-07-06  1:34         ` Bruno Haible
2021-07-06 22:29           ` Paul Eggert
2021-07-06  2:11       ` Bruno Haible
2021-07-07  8:45         ` Florian Weimer
2021-07-07 21:58           ` Paul Eggert
2021-07-08  5:36             ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2021-07-17  3:39               ` Paul Eggert

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=871r891i5w.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com \
    --to=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=bruno@clisp.org \
    --cc=bug-gnulib@gnu.org \
    --cc=eggert@cs.ucla.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).